What To Do When Rough Mix is Better

[hakim]

Hi All,

I am having a little problem with one of my mixes. I can't seem to top my rough mix. There is something about this song that sounds better dirty. I am not sure what it is... I cleaned it all up but it just feels flat and unexciting. And I prefer the rough mix which has loads of sonic incidents

So what do you do when your rough mix sounds better?

I am thinking of a few things:

1. Push through with the mix despite my feelings.
2. Go with the rough mix though my brain is saying, 'NO!'
3. Since I am the producer, pass the mix on this tune to someone else.
4. Give the mix another shot. If I do it will be my third mix on this tune.

That's what I'm thinking, I guess I'll poll it too.

[bkbirge]

Go mix something else and come back to it in a few days or weeks. If you still can't recreate the magic, go with the rough. Feeling trumps technical chops anyday.

[John Eppstein]

I realize it's unfashionable to say this, but IMHO music sounds better when you don't process the crap out of it (and I'm not referring to FX.)

[The MPCist]

Hand in the rough mix (or just call it Mix A)

[Wayne]

Is this one of those situations that reminds' how good dynamic and a little 'rough can sound?

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by hakim

!'[*]Since I am the producer, pass the mix on this tune to someone else.

This is one of the cases where getting a different view on the mix may not be a bad thing. But if you are really in love with your rough, this may handcuff the person a little into mixing it not too far away from the rough mix even though it might not be a bad idea.

[gussyg2007]

call it work in progress and say" what do you think ?" if they like you can say yer it's nearly finished just a few minor tweaks , if it's not liked then you say yer gotta do some more work just thought i'd give you a listen as to where i am

[detritusdave]

Maybe you're so used to hearing the track in its rough mix form, that making changes just sounds 'wrong'... I'd go with the advice some posters have given... leave it for a while, and don't listen to it on your ipod etc

[vernier]

Sometimes the first version (of anything) seems better because we acclimate to it and make it familiar. It's a common phenomena.

[hakim]

Originally Posted by vernier

Sometimes the first version (of anything) seems better because we acclimate to it and make it familiar. It's a common phenomena.

Yeah, I call it demo-itis.

Originally Posted by detritusdave

Maybe you're so used to hearing the track in its rough mix form, that making changes just sounds 'wrong'...

True. One of the problems is that this mix sounds so flat. The rough mix had tons of bold delays and reverb because I wanted to hear what kind of depth the tune needed. But when I reduced the amount of delay and room sounds in the mix it now sounds flat - and like you said wrong.

The tune is like a cross between the B52s and REM. So the dark dotted 1/8 and 1/4 delays and the deep and heavy low end took the song out of the bands usual element.

Originally Posted by gussyg2007

call it work in progress and say" what do you think ?"

Which one the "rough mix"?

Originally Posted by thethrillfactor

But if you are really in love with your rough, this may handcuff the person a little into mixing it not too far away from the rough mix even though it might not be a bad idea.

I think this is exactly what would happen.

I thought about printing - as stem files - some of the elements that made the rough mix so good and seeing if I could find them a home in the current mix (lets call it Mix B). What do you think?

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

I realize it's unfashionable to say this, but IMHO music sounds better when you don't process the crap out of it (and I'm not referring to FX.)

Yeah, I know what you mean. Its funny too. The rough mix is the mix with loads of 'FX'. And I love it. The current mix - Mix B - has been processed and is pritine, razor sharp. I mean it can cut glass... and I hate it. But the client wants the modern thing.

Originally Posted by Wayne

Is this one of those situations that reminds' how good dynamic and a little 'rough can sound?

Yes it is.

As for starting on another mix... I am on a tight schedule and I have another project that I am supposed to have started already so I'm behind on my work. I really didn't want to start giving another project attention before this one gets done. I admit... I do have biases and it affects me sometimes. So I have ways to control them.

[Mix Master]

If the rough has the impact you want, if it tells the story better, then it doesn't matter. I've had plenty of my roughs make the team. And every time I was asked "are you sure/is that ok?" and would always say eff it! I DID the damn thing, put-it-on-the-record. Sometimes you just nail it.

[audiomichael]

Sometimes a mastering engineer can pull a "rough mix" into place so that it doesn't stand out from the others. Use the one that tells the story.

[Jeff16years]

i always save the rough mix session just in case the client comes back saying that they liked it better. That way you can go to that and fix the things you don't like (about the rough)

[zacheus83]

Hey Hakim. I was in the same boat as you. My rough mixes ALWAYS sounded better than when I actually sat down to mix the song for 2 reasons in my opinion:

1. When I first started to mix, I would do more damage than good while EQ'ing (because I really didn't know what I was doing).

2. My room wasn't very well treated at the time with bass traps so I would take away a lot of the punch thinking I was taking away mud from most of the tracks.

At the end of many sessions I would think, "That's exactly how I want this track to sound! Nice and open!" But then I would listen to it through a different set of speakers, or listen to a pro mix and be like damn, my mix sounds super flat!

[hakim]

Originally Posted by zacheus83

Hey Hakim. I was in the same boat as you. My rough mixes ALWAYS sounded better than when I actually sat down to mix the song for 2 reasons in my opinion:

1. When I first started to mix, I would do more damage than good while EQ'ing (because I really didn't know what I was doing).

2. My room wasn't very well treated at the time with bass traps so I would take away a lot of the punch thinking I was taking away mud from most of the tracks.

At the end of many sessions I would think, "That's exactly how I want this track to sound! Nice and open!" But then I would listen to it through a different set of speakers, or listen to a pro mix and be like damn, my mix sounds super flat!

And... seems like you stopped in the middle of your story.

[Mark Kaufman]

Just because I spend countless hours on a mix doesn't mean they were well-spent, especially if the mix is worse than the rough. So lately, I've been starting all over again until I nail it...and I usually find, over and over and over and over again, that LESS is MORE. When I give it another shot, from scratch, focusing on the least amount of processing possible, I finally get it better. If it isn't better than the rough one...and the rough one isn't good enough either...then I kill everything I did on the remix and try it again, thinking "less, less, less..."

[RKrizman]

Interesting and timeworn problem. The rough mix captures an actual moment in time. Everything might be leaning up against everything else in just the right way and if you change one thing the balance falls apart. Thousands of little unconscious micro-decisions occur during the rough mix without the superego interfering. This is how you were feeling the music at the moment, so you have to respect that. It may well have more artistic validity than your state of mind when the noise comes creeping back into your head and it's time to do the FINAL MIX.

Working in a DAW, I always save the early versions of whatever I'm doing. Often I go too far in mixing and have to return back to a more primitive but honest version and have another go.

Other times, the ruff actually sucks but you're just too used to hearing it that way.

good luck,
-R

[Steve G]

I think you answered your own question simply by having to ask it. As the previous posters have said, if the rough is better, than use it. I know of countless albums where a rough has beaten out a few final mixes. You can either try and match your rough, and clean it up a bit, or just go with the rough.

Steve

[zacheus83]

Originally Posted by hakim

And... seems like you stopped in the middle of your story.

I'm not sure why you thought I didn't finish my story, unless you mean, what do I do now to prevent that from happening.

During the rough mix, we focus on making everything work together from a broad standpoint, while during the actual mix I think most mix guys go into it thinking about what they want to change in each individual track. For instance, I used to hear the strings and think, they've gotta be brighter, drums have to punch more, etc... and that's what great mix engineers do. BUT there is a point where we go too far with processing and the mix is no longer balanced, and I think that's why the rough mix sounds better... because everything in the rough mix at least WORKS together without one thing sounding too out of place.

I've heard so many times on these forums that if you get it right in the recording, then the mix should be simple and minimal.

[nativeaudio]

What Would You Do if You Rough Mix the Best of 2 Mixes?

I would use rough mix or improve it.

[Chucho]

stop calling it the rough mix and use the best one.

[hakim]

Thanks everyone! You have really supported me beyond my expectations. And the majority of Slutz opine that the "rough mix" is the way to go. So what I have decided to do is print the fundamental elements of the rough mix and improve on that.

Now there is a production decision involved with this as well. Because as I said the rough mix has a very different sound - heavy urban styled bottom - than the typical indie rock tune. And the rock guitars are pushed way back and there are quite a few combination of delays (modern Pop).

The current mix is a traditional indie rock mix. I would like to find a balance between the two. That's what I would like to do. If anyone has anymore advice I would love to hear it. Thank you.